THE TURNER PROCESS

Grey River Argus, 14 March 1940, Page 9

THE TURNER PROCESS

(To The Editor, The Magazine Pagel

Madam, May I again crave the hospitality of “The Magazine Page”? 1 wish to reply to the further commentary, under this heading, which has been submitted by Mr Wm. L. Robertson, of Onekaka.

I am very much pleased to learn that the articles on this subject, which you. have published during the last few months, have satisfied Mr Robertson that a good case has been made out for the establishment of the projected industry. Our only re-maining-differences would seem Io be that of its ownership and control. But, examination cf Mr Robertson’s commentary inclines me to think that we may be agreed even upon those points. In the course of his article, he states:—-

“The Objective of the New Zealand Labour Movement '□ the Socialisation of the Means of Production, Distribution and Exchange. This phrase has little meaning except when interpreted in terms of actual practice.”

It may be inferred, from his sei*ond sentence, that Mr Robertson, like so many others, finds it well-nigh impossible to reconcile the avowed objective of the New Zealand Labour Movement with some of the recent sayings and doings of one of its appointed leaders, Mr P. C. Webb. This gentleman has praised the present search for flow-oil, being made by an overseas capitalistic concern, and has waxed eloquent about the benefits, which will accrue to the people of this Dominion, in the event of oil being found in commercial quantities. Let me forecast its consequences—if successful. No one disputes the statement that oil, as a fuel is superior to coal, for the purpose 'of generating energy. Its sale, in adequate quantities and at reasonable prices in the fuel market, must reduce the demand for coal and so must put poal-miners out of work. But, experience has shown that the cost of energy to the consumer is not necessarily cheapened by the change-over. In 1913, the free Scottish oil-shale industry supplied fuel-oil to the Navy at 25/- per ton. To procure the British market for Persian oil, control of the oil-shale industry was secured, first of all, by the exploiters of the Persian oil to the misfortune of the oil-shale miners, and then the Navy, in 1917, had to pay £3O per ton for fuel-oil at Abadan. The price of fuel-oil to the Navy, had risen twenty-four fold in four years! The British community had to pay the bill! As these historical facts cannot be denied, the coalminers may reasonably demand to be told by the Minister of Mines just why he, of all people, seeks to destroy their occupation merely to provide “benefits” of such negative worth for the people of New Zealand. Fortunately for the community, the chances of finding flow-oil. in commercial quantities in New Zealand, are almost non-existent.

Mr Robertson opines that I “would be only too happy to cooper te with the New Zealand Government in establishing a system of plants under people’s ownership and control..” His sur-

mise was correct as will appear later in this letter. I have always contended that the indigenous resources of every country should be exploited for the benefit of the people of that country and that no country should allow its fuel resources to be controlled and exploited by any foreigner. If Mr Robertson accept that definition, then Im and I are agreed about “ownership.” Now, let me examine “control.” Everyone has had experience of "the back-seat driver” and agrees that he is a disturbing distraction and a danger to the safe-driving of a motorcar, if the driver turn to argue with him. Many people still remember the fate which befell the “S.S 1 . Titanic” on her maiden voyage. The Captain allowed his authority to be overruled by the demand, made by the Chairman of his Board of Directors, that the ship be driven “Full Speed Ahead.” in the attempt to break the Atlantic East to West Record. The boat crashed into an iceberg and sank! For those and innumerable other reasons, it is my considered opinion that “control” should be vested in those actively engaged in the operation of the projected industry. Provided operations be conducted to the advantage of the community as a whole and under conditions congenial to all those engaged in it, interference should not be tolerated from anv quarter. If Mr Robertson agree with that condition, also then he and I are in complete agreement. Some months ago, I received a courteous letter from Mr Walter Nash, in the course of which he wrote:—

“I can assure you that the Government fully realises the necessity of ensuring the maximum possible exploitation and utilization of all available raw materials and resources. If present standards of living are to be maintained and progressively improved there can be no possible alternative to such a course. Inevitably there will be a certain amount of opposition to the inauguration of such a policy, but I am satisfied that the majority of people appreciate the position and the need for vigorous action in this direction."

Those opinions are obviously held by Mr Robertson. His desire to identify the opponents to the project is quite understandable. However, the opponents are notoriously shy and seif-effacing. Obstruction does not appear directly in published reports, but it does appear in confidential reports circulated to committees and “Vested Interests.” Such reports as may be published are generally framed in language described as “Scientific,” arrive at no conclusion on any subject whatsoever and can always be quoted in support of any desired point of view and particularly in vindication of the good intentions of “the powers-that-be.” Hence, it is always difficult to pin anyone down to specific acts of obstruction without violating confidences. But, it is not necessary for Mr. Robertson to procure evidence of obstruction by such means. Let me remind him of Voltaire’s prayer:—“l wish my enemy would writ ea book.” Allow me to examine, for him, a new formula fav-

; oured by Mr Webb. At least twice in one recent mterI view, when speaking of some alleged pronosal, which was said to have been examined by the experts attached to the Bureau" of Industries and to the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. Mr Webb is reported to have said that the government exDC"ts “could not make any recommendation on which the Government co’ild act.” Formulae have their uses, especially when used to bemuse unthinking people. But, what meaning is that formula intended to convey? It docs not convey any opinion on the merits of the alleged proposal; nor doos it imply that the experts blessed arc “the experts’ io a harpcSed Minister anxious to escape from ari untenable position—were free to make a recommendation “on oath and conscience.” On the contiaiy, the formula does convey the impression that “the experts” were called upon to produce a recommendation acceptable to the Government ana that they “could not 0.0 so. mat thought-provoking sentence deserves examination. When the meaning is in doubt, the ambiguity is due usually to the use of the wrong conjugate verb in the sentence. Change “could into “would”, or, much more simply, change “c” in that word, into’ “w” and the sentence is fully informative. But, it takes on a very curious significance when read in conjunction with another statement made by Mr Webb, at the same interview, when questioned regarding the steps taken to aet information which might lead to the establishment of an “oil from coal” industry in New Zealand. He is reported to have said:

“Arrangements had been made to send' exports to Europe with the object of obtaining a report for submission to the Mines Department in New Zealand on the operations of these industries.

Inferentially, it is hoped to find experts overseas who will be willing to produce a recommendation acceptable to the Mines Department or to the Government. It is not clear if the part is to be deemed equal to the whole. But, as Mr Webb is aware, the average reader does not examine statements so critically. Then, if my interpretation be incorrect what meaning did he wish to convey by his formula? . .. , Last April, Mr Webb invited me to build my plant adjacent to the Strongman Mine. I accepted, stipulating only that a site should be made available, at a “peppercorn” rent, and that the coal should be delivered at pit-cost. Those conditions were accepted by Mr Webb. But, on the 6th September, he signed a letter to me, one sentence of which reads; —■

“1 cannot undertake that the coal in question will necessarily be coal produced in one of' the State Mines, as the low sulphur content of the State coals necessitated their conservation for other purposes.”

Do the words “other purposes” refer lo the ill-conceived Onekaka project? If so, it is necessary to remind Mr. Webb of the announcement, contained in official publication C.5.R.29 that the coal from the Strongman Mine, “the coal in question,” will, not yield metallurgical coke. Thus, it is evident that “the proposal,” wrongly attributed to me, was actually made to me by Mr. Webb, accented bv me and subsequently cancelled by him for an invalid reason. In the hope of removing the “obstruction” to the project, Mr Savage invited me to attend a meeting in his room on the 15th June last. There. I met Mr Sullivan, for the first time, and other Ministers already known to me. The conference lasted two hours. At Mr Sullivan’s request, it was agreed that I should meet the experts of his department. The meeting took place on 11th December. Before the meeting, I was promised a copy of the report to be made and laid before the Minister. So far, I have not received it! Further comment would be superfluous! I am Madam, Your obedient servant, CHARLES TURNER. 49, Thompson Street, Wellington. 7th, March, 1940. _

No amount of make-up, cosmetics, or care in dress, valuable though these be, can compensate for the failure to be a vital and healthy animal.—Joseph K. Folsom in “Journal of Home Economics. When brown shoes become stained, rub them with a rag dipped in petrol. Do this in the open, and refrain from smoking. The leather will look like new again. A teaspoonful of salt in the water in which apples are placed prevents them turning brown.